Martin/Zimmerman-----Poll

[The Man]

Sorry, but it's very difficult for you to argue any kind of impartiality while simultaneously promoting one of the principals in your signature.

Even with the heavy slant put on your poll, you don't seem to be getting many backers. None of us were there, we have to rely on our instincts and our choice of media outlets, of which there are many, offering enormously varied opinions, or we can 'hold fire' [for want of a less ironic term] and wait to see what evidence is presented in the case.

We cant trust any evidence the state presents at this point as the investigators for the state signed a false affidavit..therefore there isn't any evidence...never was.
The special prosecutor in this case is known to be a hard hitter without conscious...Dishonesty occurred right from the start to get an arrest...without that dishonesty there would have been no arrest.

And yes I am impartial.....I am not going to agree to a lynch job
Innocent until proven guilty...Many are out to hang the guy based on early media reports...Had it been presented properly the entire case would be non issue.
We see why the DA didnt press charges...He couldnt do it without being dishonest.
People should be outraged that the special DA and the DA investigators are dishonest and wrote a false affidavit to gain an arrest..thats pretty much what they call rail roaded.
So how do you do it...if you cant convict the guy/ call in the special DA/ give them immunity from misconduct and proceed.
No thanks.
The law is the law..if it doesnt apply to those that represent the law,the country has gone to hell
But people want a lynching and dont care about the truth.........The reason our system was designed as such is prevent exactly what is occurring right now.
This isnt justice.

 

[The Man]

But dont take my word for it.
This is what a law professor at Harvard states {the most prestigious and credited college around}

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz made an appearance on on MSNBC’s Hardball to discuss the Zimmerman arrest affidavit, and had some incredibly harsh language for Angela Corey concerning her actions in the George Zimmerman prosecution.

Dershowitz is a well-known Democrat with a column on the Huffington Post, but seemed stunned by how poorly written the affidavit was, going so far as to call it “irresponsible and unethical,” as well as Corey’s actions politically motivated. He also said that if the prosecution didn’t have more evidence for the case than what we’ve seen, “a good judge would throw it out.”


Smerconish: Joining me now, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. Professor, I’ve really looked forward to this conversation. You’ve seen the affidavit of probable cause, what do you make of it?

Dershowitz: It won’t suffice. Most affidavits of probable cause are very thin; this is so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge. There’s simply nothing in there that would justify second degree murder. The elements of the crime aren’t established.

Basically what’s in the affidavit is what’s in the public domain, with the exception of a few little things that were put forward by your previous commentator. But the fact that the mother identified the voice as that of her son, of course, we all knew that was going to happen. There’s nothing in there of course either about the stains on the back of Zimmerman’s shirt, the blood on the back of his head, the bloody nose, all of that.

It’s not only thin, it’s irresponsible. I think that what you have here is an elected public official who made a campaign speech last night for reelection when she gave her presentation, and over-charged, way over-charged. This case will not, if the evidence is no stronger that what appears in the probable-cause affidavit, this case will result in an acquittal.

Very strongly worded statements from Dershowitz, who basically stopped just short of directly claiming Corey engaged in prosecutorial misconduct by her actions.

http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/dershowitz-zimmerman-affidavit-irresponsible-and-unethical

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

And yes I am impartial......

Can't see it myself. Don't see you trying your damnedest to do a demolition job on the defence.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Come to that, I don't see any links in your sig to webpages that support the dead guy, either.

 

[The Man]

Can't see it myself. Don't see you trying your damnedest to do a demolition job on the defence.

How am I doing a demolition Job on the state?
They done it to themselves I only provided the documentation to show their dishonestly
How do you propose I demolition the defense?....Has his attorney done anything unethical in this case?

Come to that, I don't see any links in your sig to webpages that support the dead guy, either.

The state has unlimited resources....Zimmerman doesnt.
He has to have tens of thousands of dollars for a defense
He cant work..has to hide or will be killed...the Black Panthers alone have a reward on him
Has to pay for electronic monitoring.
Rent food etc...he has family

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

How do you propose I demolition the defense?....

Much the same way that you have done with the prosecution.

Go read up every newspaper article that supports the proposition, cut paste the bits that you believe have more credibility simply because they are attributed to a law professor. Yes they're out there, and if you were as impartial as you claim to be you'd have referenced them already.

Another way would be to replace the sentimental sig with a similar one soliciting support for the family of the man who zimmerman killed.

I don't have sufficient facts on which to base my decision as to his culpability in this killing.

But if you seriously think that you are impartial in this matter, I'd be happy to donate....to the cost of buying you a dictionary.

 

[The Man]

Much the same way that you have done with the prosecution.

Go read up every newspaper article that supports the proposition, cut paste the bits that you believe have more credibility simply because they are attributed to a law professor. Yes they're out there, and if you were as impartial as you claim to be you'd have referenced them already.

Another way would be to replace the sentimental sig with a similar one soliciting support for the family of the man who zimmerman killed.

I don't have sufficient facts on which to base my decision as to his culpability in this killing.

But if you seriously think that you are impartial in this matter, I'd be happy to donate....to the cost of buying you a dictionary.

Much the same way that you have done with the prosecution.

Are you familiar with this case at all?
The watchman originally was supposed to have chased down and shot a 12 year old kid on the way back from the candy store.
Turns out this kid wasn't 12 but was 17 and was smashing the watchman head into the sidewalk...the 17 year old was shot.

Go read up every newspaper article that supports the proposition, cut paste the bits that you believe have more credibility simply because they are attributed to a law professor. Yes they're out there, and if you were as impartial as you claim to be you'd have referenced them already.

That wasn't your argument..your argument was why didn't I demo the defense in the same manner...The defense has done anything unethical....Find it and post it if you think it exists...prove my impartialness rather than merely state it.

Another way would be to replace the sentimental sig with a similar one soliciting support for the family of the man who zimmerman killed.

They have the support of the state as I already mentioned...the state does the prosecution..doesnt cost martins family a dime.
Zimmerman has to provide for himself...You should familiarize yourself with the American criminal system before making such statements.

I don't have sufficient facts on which to base my decision as to his culpability in this killing.

We all are waiting to see if any actual evidence of a murder comes in....as of now it just isnt there.
The fact that the state wrote a false affidavit should be evidence enough that there is no evidence.

But if you seriously think that you are impartial in this matter, I'd be happy to donate....to the cost of buying you a dictionary

I am impartial ...you can claim otherwise all you wish...I had even considered Zimmerman party responsible and thought he should do some time...but as evidence began to emerge showing the violent attack he suffered coupled to the fact the state has attempted to cover this attack up...I support Zimmerman in an impartial manner.
Regardless he should be given the benefit of the doubt{impartial} until proven otherwise..thats the entire point you are missing.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Are you familiar with this case at all?

Er...yes, are you?

...I support Zimmerman in an impartial manner.

Priceless.

Zimmerman's chance of an impartial trial has been compromised by the poor performance of law enforcement. He shot and killed a man.That much is a fact. For what it's worth,I think the only way for him to stand any chance of a proper and fair trial would have been to charge him and bail him the night that he shot Trayvon Martin.

Instead, there was an unacceptable delay while every agitator on both sides of the argument lobbied as hard as they could for the hearts and minds[however small] of the public.The opportunity to quarrantine the evidence for later viewing by an impartial jury was irreversably lost. As a result it's going to be as hard to find an impartial jury as it was for the OJ trial. And if any of the potential jurors is foolish enough to say "I support ................. in an impartial manner" They will very quickly find themselves relegated to the role of spectator.

 

[The Man]

Er...yes, are you?



Priceless.

Zimmerman's chance of an impartial trial has been compromised by the poor performance of law enforcement. He shot and killed a man.That much is a fact. For what it's worth,I think the only way for him to stand any chance of a proper and fair trial would have been to charge him and bail him the night that he shot Trayvon Martin.

Instead, there was an unacceptable delay while every agitator on both sides of the argument lobbied as hard as they could for the hearts and minds[however small] of the public.The opportunity to quarrantine the evidence for later viewing by an impartial jury was irreversably lost. As a result it's going to be as hard to find an impartial jury as it was for the OJ trial. And if any of the potential jurors is foolish enough to say "I support ................. in an impartial manner" They will very quickly find themselves relegated to the role of spectator.

I am not worried about an impartial jury...they can have a giant pool to choose from
My concern is with the state and the practice of dishonesty....it has already begun...you cant have a fair trial with dishonesty involved.
As the affidavit is written it has been proven to be false by one of the people that signed it...Even with that lie included,the element of the crime does not exist...it should have been tossed...Point is it shouldnt even go to trial.

Its really more of a civil matter than a criminal matter....Martins family could sue Zimmerman and should have an easy win

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Its really more of a civil matter than a criminal matter....

Since when ? In what screwed up parallel universe? He shot and killed a man.

 

[The Man]

I am impartial...had there been any evidence I would also be in support of convicting him.

I am just the delivery boy here with the news.
The investigators for the special prosecutor are impartial...with a falsified affidavit
The prosecutor is impartial.
The judge was impartial.

I cant support that..I dont support railroading and lynchings,
I support the martin family as they lost a son...however it is in the states hands now.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

You are not impartial.

 

[The Man]

Since when ? In what screwed up parallel universe? He shot and killed a man.

In self defense.....The state had to falsify documents to charge him.
You are aware the man that was shot beat Zimmerman and was smashing his head on the sidewalk.
You are gonna shoot.

 

[The Man]

You are not impartial.

How so?

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

You're very quick to assume that the man with the firearm acted in self-defence. If you were anywhere near as impartial as you claim to be, then you must concede that if your fists are the only weapon that you have at your disposal, you could just as easily use them as a defensive weapon.

But you're not.

 

[The Man]

You are impartial.
You see nothing wrong with a false affidavit to obtain a charge.
That is supportive of lynching justice...and is highly impartial to the accused.

 

[The Man]

You're very quick to assume that the man with the firearm acted in self-defence. If you were anywhere near as impartial as you claim to be, then you must concede that if your fists are the only weapon that you have at your disposal, you could just as easily use them as a defensive weapon.

But you're not.

You really should read my entire thread where pictures and documentation was found to show the savage beating ...he obviously was unable to prevent his head from getting smashed.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

You see nothing wrong with a false affidavit to obtain a charge.
That is supportive of lynching justice...and is highly impartial to the accused.

If you're going to continue to pull this kind of nonsense out of thin air , I'm going to discontinue attempting to debate with you. So far all I have done is pointed out that despite the consensus that your poll is ridiculously skewed, it's not delivering the results for which it was loaded. I've repeatedly and comprehensively rebutted your ludicrous claims to impartiality without ever once offering an opinion as to what I think happened on that night - and simply because you have been soundly beaten by your own lack of logic and impartiality, you are now resorting to putting up straw men and claiming that I support them? This isn't debate, this is repetition and deflection. Nowhere have I said that I support a false affidavit to obtain a charge.

Simple yes/no question for you..........WERE YOU THERE?

 

[The Man]

You're very quick to assume that the man with the firearm acted in self-defence.

So he smashed his own head on the sidewalk after he shot him?
I am done here,,,its getting too silly for me

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

For sure..its as if they want to have a public execution without a trial as the way it was done centuries ago

No more than you, Sir wish to see the shooter released without the indignity of further question and awarded a medal.